Let us twist the DIALs

[TerraDave]

this may or may not be self explanatory

EDIT: Ok, below is sort of a list of all the main choices for the game, on both the DM and Player side.

Couple of questions:

1)what would you choose
2) what else could be here, or what is here that you don't expect to see.

4d6, keep best-->point buy
------------------>More generous but random
------------------> 3d6 in order
------------------> Alt char gen (life path, 0 level test characters, etc)

Ability scores-->Simple Skills-->More involved Skills
------------------> Skill challenges
------------------> Non combat conflict rules
------------------> Old school, roll less approach

Standard Races--> Feat customizable races
------------------> Flexible race features
------------------> Variant, non core, races and sub-races
------------------> Themes, origins, backgrounds, etc

Standard Classes --> Feat customizable classes (--> custom/point buy classes)
------------------> Flexible class features
------------------> Variant, non core, classes
------------------> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)
----------------(--> see themes above)

9 alignments--> that matters somewhat
------------------> Or not
------------------> Or are different

Spells for some --> Powers for more
------------------> Combat maneuvers
------------------> Meta-magic
----------------(--> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)

“BECMI with ascending AC” combat --> more grid oriented, attacks of opportunity combat
------------------> Action points
------------------> (more interesting) crits and fumbles
------------------> Parry rolls, facing, other combat options
------------------>Alt defenses (static if saves default…)
------------------> (see power and maneuvers above)

Healing daily, or with a cleric --> more generous resting rules
------------------> Surges
------------------> Wound system

Drop at 0, dead at -10 --> dead at this…or that…but not quite yet
------------------> 0=dead

Opponents in a monster book --> have simple underlying math and can be adjusted easily
------------------> “built” with some work

Standard equipment --> superior/exotic items
------------------> Odd and inferior items
------------------> Alchemical items
------------------> Encumbrance--> bulk system

Default treasure set by DM--> that can sometimes be made or bought
------------------> Formally influenced by PCs
------------------> Cursed
------------------> Intelligent
------------------> Artifact
------------------> Trade goods and non-standard treasure
------------------> Alternate rewards (titles, etc)
------------------> Ray guns and flying cars

Adventure with the party--> +trusted retainers
------------------> Followers, some day
------------------> A castle, some day
------------------> A domain, some day
------------------> Complications (ie a personal life)
------------------> Contacts (with rules for them)

Minimal default setting --> Elaborated default
------------------>Homebrew
------------------> Published setting
------------------> Default cosmology -->Alt cosmology

 

[TerraDave]

No, I guess it wasn't that clear.

I have edited the OP. In any case, feel free to react, both on what you would want to choose, and what the choices should be.

 

[Mercurius]

It is hard to speculate on this because it remains to be seen what the mechanism for modularity is going to be. It seems likely that there will be a very simple, basic "core" game that is the common denominator to 5E (except for house ruled versions). After that, there are various ways modularity could be implemented and until we have a better sense of how they're going to do that, we're just wildly speculating (which is fine, of course!).

As I've said elsewhere, one approach that I could see them going with is that there will be three or four tiers or categories of 5E:
- Core - the basic game common to all, basically comprised of the six abilities scores, simple and non-customizable classes and races.
- Modular Options - everything else, which you can pick and choose from.
- Advanced D&D - this would be the default configuration of modular options, what WotC recommends for tournament play and a more tactical oriented game. One way this could manifest is as modular configurations specific to campaign settings. So, for instance, in the 5E Forgotten Realms book, there would a different set of modular options than in, say, the 5E Eberron book. This would make it relatively easy for tournament play.
- House Ruled/Toolkit Approach - this is the implied fourth option which treats all of the above, perhaps even the core, as a toolkit.

So all 5E games would start with the basic core and could take one of three routes from there: 1) they could pick and choose their modular options, customized to a homebrew setting (or variant of an official setting); 2) They could play "AD&D" and/or pick a campaign world and its recommended Advanced rules; 3) They could treat the whole shebang as a toolkit and make their own variant of 5E.

All of which is a way to frame my view on your dials, TerraDave: I think all will be part of the picture. A lot of what you mention are actually flavorings rather than mechanical elements, and I would suggest that both flavor (fluff) and mechanics (crunch) follow the same four-part approach to 5E that I mention above. The default flavor will be classic D&D, even archetypal D&D, so we might not see anything too exotic (except for perhaps a dash or two). Then there will be advanced options and campaign-specific or theme-specific options, which could include literally anything.

 

[steeldragons]

Wow! Thanks for giving me something to do this afternoon! lol.

Ok. Let's seeeee...

Ok, below is sort of a list of all the main choices for the game, on both the DM and Player side.

Couple of questions:

1)what would you choose
2) what else could be here, or what is here that you don't expect to see.

4d6, keep best-->point buy
------------------>More generous but random
------------------> 3d6 in order
------------------> Alt char gen (life path, 0 level test characters, etc)

I think a 3d6 and a 4d6 (keep the highest).

Then each applied 1) "In order" for those in the "work with wutcha got" camp
and/or 2) "Place as desired" for those wanting a bit more player freedom/class choice vs. class by what the dice say.

Ability scores-->Simple Skills-->More involved Skills
------------------> Skill challenges
------------------> Non combat conflict rules
------------------> Old school, roll less approach

Yes to Ability scores (by which I'm guessing by the rest of this grouping to mean using/rolling "Ability checks" vs. specific skill checks.).
Yes to Simple Skills -broken down/applicable by Class.
Yes to Skill challenges in certain circumstances.
Yes to Old School, roll less approach.

I'm really on the fence for the "non-combat conflict rules". I am, again, presuming here that you are referring to things like "Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate" type skills...On the one hand, I am all for "Role-your-Play" over "Roll-your-Play". On the other, I see the value for those Players (not characters) who might not be the most vocal or charismatic but want/imagineer their PCs to be so. So...I don't know. Maybe if presented a different way they'd be ok...but, I think I'm gonna go with the gut here and stick to my first choice, No. Leave Non-combat conflict skills/rules/checks out.

NOW, if you mean "non-combat conflict rules" to mean something like ye olde "Morale" rules/checks. Then yes. That should come back.

Standard Races--> Feat customizable races
------------------> Flexible class features
------------------> Variant, non core, races and sub-races
------------------> Themes, origins, backgrounds, etc

Yes for Standard races. Yes, also, for additional customizable Race-based features. This is something that really only recently was brought to my attention/I saw as a possibility for character advance-/enhancement. So any starting PC can be an Elf or Dwarf or what have you with a limited set of Racial Skills. As they increase in level, they can customize themselves further with other Racial Skill options (better/increased/innate spell casting or bow-based/archery tricks for elves, specializing attacks/damage vs. certain foes or increasing resistances for dwarves, for example).

I also have no problem with "Themes" or "Origins" type stuff, but that's really on a DM-by-DM, group/world-by-group/world case basis. Presented as optional additional rules with some examples and guideliens how to develop your own, sure. Ok.

I'm a bit tired of sub-races myself. But I suppose, a select FEW for each base race would be fine, and help lend in world/game flavor, would be ok.

But, like, 3 each! None of this 10 types of elves and 2 kinds of gnomes silliness.

And not introduced until AFTER the Basic/Intro game set. You can be a Dwarf. Then later, there's also this and that kind of Dwarf to choose from.
3 Dwarves to choose from. 3 Elves. 3 Gnomes...I don't really see how you could do 3 Halflings, but fine. Even 3 Humans, if you want I suppose, tweak a few ability scores and permit/build in a few specializations/skills/tricks.

Standard Classes --> Feat customizable classes (--> custom/point buy classes)
------------------> Flexible class features
------------------> Variant, non core, classes
------------------> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)
----------------(--> see themes above)

Yes Standard Classes...with customizable features (whether they are called "Skills/Feats/Powers/Talents/Abilities" I don't care. But pick ONE term and stick to it. I shouldn't have to keep track of 5 different sets of "things I can do." I need my Class, my level, and a set of 'things I can do"...2 sets (if you absolutely MUST distinguish between "Skills" and "Feats" or "Powers" or whatever, tops.

Power sources...I like the categorizing of things that way for flavoring the class archetype...but I suppose it really isn't a necessary element. I mean, I've been differentiating between Divine and Arcane magic since BECMI...and "magic" vs. "Psionics" since 1e...I don't need specific "assigned by the rules" power sources.

9 alignments--> that matters somewhat
------------------> Or not
------------------> Or are different

I like and use them. I think the best way of presenting them for today's (or tomorrow's) game, given the amount of flack they take from many gamers, is as an Optional element of play. Myself, yes, 9 points. Yes they matter. And yes, for certain classes you WILL find yourself "in trouble" for breaking out of certain alignments.

Spells for some --> Powers for more
------------------> Combat maneuvers
------------------> Meta-magic
----------------(--> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)

Spells for Spell-Caster Classes! "Skills/Feats/Powers/Talents" I don't care what you call them...but they are NOT magic for "Non-caster" Classes. Combat maneuvers for the marital/warrior classes, yeah sure. Something for their players to play around with and keep track of so all of the "My Fighter can't do what your Wizard can" nonsense might die down finally.

Meta-magic could be included as skills available to Caster classes. Sure, why not?

Not enough experience with "alternate systems" to really comment. But supplying one or two alternate methods as "optional/alternate rules" couldn't hurt, I suppose.

“BECMI with ascending AC” combat --> more grid oriented, attacks of opportunity combat
------------------> Action points
------------------> (more interesting) crits and fumbles
------------------> Parry rolls, facing, other combat options
------------------>Alt defenses (static if saves default…)
------------------> (see power and maneuvers above)

BECMI with ascending AC combat. Fine with me. Done and done. Crits and fumbles seem easy enough to include with a couple of "optional/alternate" tables. Parries and other combat options could,. similarly be presented as "optional rules to include"...

Let the groups/DMs decide how complicated, precise, streamlined, grinding or quick they want their combats to be. Let them decide how important or detailed combat is to their game.

Healing daily, or with a cleric --> more generous resting rules
------------------> Surges
------------------> Wound system

Drop at 0, dead at -10 --> dead at this…or that…but not quite yet
------------------> 0=dead

Gods DO AWAY WITH SURGES! Clerical healing. Magical potions. Mundane 'first aid' and/or "medicinal herb" knowledge/training for any class.

Unconscious at 0. Dead at -10...As it has been, so it ever shall be...in my games.

Opponents in a monster book --> have simple underlying math and can be adjusted easily
------------------> “built” with some work

I'm not sure what this is saying. Yes, the monsters should be statted up and listed somewhere...whether its accessible only by the DM or a separate "monster book" of its own, I don't really care that much.

Standard equipment --> superior/exotic items
------------------> Odd and inferior items
------------------> Alchemical items
------------------> Encumbrance--> bulk system

All of this stuff.

Default treasure set by DM--> that can sometimes be made or bought
------------------> Formally influenced by PCs
------------------> Cursed
------------------> Intelligent
------------------> Artifact
------------------> Trade goods and non-standard treasure
------------------> Alternate rewards (titles, etc)
------------------> Ray guns and flying cars

Wow. Ok. Here goes: Yes. Yes, sometimes. NO! Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Sure, I guess, in addition to real/monetary & magic "treasure." Not in my games, no.

Adventure with the party--> +trusted retainers
------------------> Followers, some day
------------------> A castle, some day
------------------> A domain, some day
------------------> Complications (ie a personal life)
------------------> Contacts (with rules for them)

1) Of course. 2) Trusted retainers are always welcome. 3-5) Some day. Some day. Some day. 6) If the Players/DMs like those kinds of story elements in game (personally, I do). 7) Sure, why not?

Minimal default setting --> Elaborated default
------------------>Homebrew
------------------> Published setting
------------------> Default cosmology -->Alt cosmology

Personally, I have my own elaborate homebrew. BUT, for new/beginner players & (especially) DMs, I think some framework of a setting should be in place for immediate play. Guidelines to world/setting building could be included as/for "alternate" settings though, I think.

A default cosmology should also be presented for the same reasons. Once a DM gets to wanting to build their own world, they can worry about "finger-painting" with the structure of the cosmos. But to begin with, yes, I'd say there should be a default cosmology presented for easy/immediate use.

--SD

 

[TerraDave]

It is hard to speculate on this because it remains to be seen what the mechanism for modularity is going to be.

Your tierring makes sense, but I guess I would turn its on its head. (And I think the "tournament rule" was in 2E...was it in 3E?)

If you have to accommodate all this: how? In a sense, these choices drive how the rules are organized and presented.

Some things above can be done through simple options. Here is one way to make characters, here is another. Here is one dying rule, here is another.

Some can be done almost 100% on the DMs side of the screen...as long as they are put there. But if the PHB has a bunch of setting, or odd equipment, or magic items...then it may get more difficult.

Then there are the bits that may take up more page count, and possibly interact in weird ways. Martial powers or combat manuevers? Rules implicitly or explicitly built around AoO...and then no AoO.

But I guess thats why we have professional designers.

 

[TerraDave]

SD: With the monsters, what I was referring to was how they are made. Pre 3E was sort of "natural", 3E had building rules, 4E has much simpler "back of a napkin" building rules, that can even be used for NPCs.

 

[steeldragons]

SD: With the monsters, what I was referring to was how they are made. Pre 3E was sort of "natural", 3E had building rules, 4E has much simpler "back of a napkin" building rules, that can even be used for NPCs.

Oh. Ok. Well, put me in the "Pre-3e" side of the dial. I don't want to have to (nor do I think any new/beginner DM should have to) "build" my monsters. I can tweak pre-done ones as I see fit.

--SD

 

[Tallifer]

4d6, keep best-->point buy
------------------>More generous but random
------------------> 3d6 in order
------------------> Alt char gen (life path, 0 level test characters, etc)

Ability scores-->Simple Skills-->More involved Skills
------------------> Skill challenges
------------------> Non combat conflict rules
------------------> Old school, roll less approach

Standard Races--> Feat customizable races
------------------> Flexible class features
------------------> Variant, non core, races and sub-races
------------------> Themes, origins, backgrounds, etc

Standard Classes --> Feat customizable classes (--> custom/point buy classes)
------------------> Flexible class features
------------------> Variant, non core, classes
------------------> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)
----------------(--> see themes above)

9 alignments--> that matters somewhat
------------------> Or not
------------------> Or are different

Spells for some --> Powers for more
------------------> Combat maneuvers
------------------> Meta-magic
----------------(--> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)

“BECMI with ascending AC” combat --> more grid oriented, attacks of opportunity combat
------------------> Action points
------------------> (more interesting) crits and fumbles
------------------> Parry rolls, facing, other combat options
------------------>Alt defenses (static if saves default…)
------------------> (see power and maneuvers above)

Healing daily, or with a cleric --> more generous resting rules
------------------> Surges
------------------> Wound system

Drop at 0, dead at -10 --> dead at this…or that…but not quite yet
------------------> 0=dead

Opponents in a monster book --> have simple underlying math and can be adjusted easily
------------------> “built” with some work

Standard equipment --> superior/exotic items
------------------> Odd and inferior items
------------------> Alchemical items
------------------> Encumbrance--> bulk system

Default treasure set by DM--> that can sometimes be made or bought
------------------> Formally influenced by PCs
------------------> Cursed
------------------> Intelligent
------------------> Artifact
------------------> Trade goods and non-standard treasure
------------------> Alternate rewards (titles, etc)
------------------> Ray guns and flying cars

Adventure with the party--> +trusted retainers
------------------> Followers, some day
------------------> A castle, some day
------------------> A domain, some day
------------------> Complications (ie a personal life)
------------------> Contacts (with rules for them)

Minimal default setting --> Elaborated default
------------------>Homebrew
------------------> Published setting
------------------> Default cosmology -->Alt cosmology[/QUOTE]

 

[the Jester]

4d6, keep best-->point buy
------------------>More generous but random
------------------> 3d6 in order
------------------> Alt char gen (life path, 0 level test characters, etc)

4d6 keep best, in order, is my preference; but I'm okay with any dice-based method of character generation. I will never allow point buy stat gen in my campaign. Never, never, never.

Ability scores-->Simple Skills-->More involved Skills
------------------> Skill challenges
------------------> Non combat conflict rules
------------------> Old school, roll less approach

I do like skill challenges as a framework, but the system needs a major overhaul with better examples and an explicit acknowledgement that the pcs, not the dm, chooses the skills involved; the dm adjudicates how (and if!) they work in the challenge.

That said, I favor a simpler skill system with all skill checks based on ability scores and a secondary skill that gives you a bonus to checks within that skill's purview. Also, I prefer pc-defined secondary skills vs. a list (I have no problem with a pc choosing "rat catcher," "butler", "diplomat", "sage", "farmer", "painter", etc.)

Standard Races--> Feat customizable races
------------------> Flexible class features
------------------> Variant, non core, races and sub-races
------------------> Themes, origins, backgrounds, etc

Fewer races without option overload. I'm okay with alternative races in other books, as long as it's absolutely clear that the dm is under no obligation to shoehorn them into his game.

Standard Classes --> Feat customizable classes (--> custom/point buy classes)
------------------> Flexible class features
------------------> Variant, non core, classes
------------------> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)
----------------(--> see themes above)

I favor a very limited list of base classes, with advancement options via prestige class in a very mix & match way. So your base class might be "fighter" and there might be an "axeman" that gives you certain abilities that you cannot otherwise gain.

9 alignments--> that matters somewhat
------------------> Or not
------------------> Or are different

I think 3e got alignments about right, with supernatural creatures resistant to damage unless it was from an opposing alignment, etc.

Spells for some --> Powers for more
------------------> Combat maneuvers
------------------> Meta-magic
----------------(--> Variant power sources (psionics, alt magic systems)

Powers et al are great as an add-on option, but for the base game, I think we need to kill the beast that is option overload and perform a ritual so that it cannot ever return.

“BECMI with ascending AC” combat --> more grid oriented, attacks of opportunity combat
------------------> Action points
------------------> (more interesting) crits and fumbles
------------------> Parry rolls, facing, other combat options
------------------>Alt defenses (static if saves default…)
------------------> (see power and maneuvers above)

I like 4e's use of Fort, Ref and Will as defenses, but dislike the reliance on the grid. Eliminate OAs as a main part of combat; keep action points; keep crits and have a system in place for maiming combatants through crits.

Screw parry or dodge rolls, we need to speed combat up, not slow it down.

3e did a fairly good job with combat stunts like trip, disarm, etc, but they need to be better written with an eye to making sure that no one tactic/feat combo becomes TEH BESTEST (Improved Trip in 3.5, I'm lookin' at you!).

Healing daily, or with a cleric --> more generous resting rules
------------------> Surges
------------------> Wound system

Let's go back to the days when if you were almost dead, you weren't perfectly fine the next day, shall we? The "Fully Recovered after Five Hours!!" thing is great for promoting a certain type of playstyle but utterly eviscerates any hope of a campaign where lingering wounds are a concern.

This goes along with 4e's attitude towards resource management in general- "pretty much shine it" - which I also think needs its throat slit.

Opponents in a monster book --> have simple underlying math and can be adjusted easily
------------------> “built” with some work

4e got monster creation right, though I miss the complex toolkit of 3e's monster creation medleys. (4 templates, 3 classes, one prestige class and some feat switches, six hours later I have a monster for my high level game!) I'd like to see an alternative toolkit for dms to use, but the standard should be based on the 4e system.

That said, I'm totally in favor of 'classed' npcs working like pcs.

Standard equipment --> superior/exotic items
------------------> Odd and inferior items
------------------> Alchemical items
------------------> Encumbrance--> bulk system

All this.

Default treasure set by DM--> that can sometimes be made or bought
------------------> Formally influenced by PCs
------------------> Cursed
------------------> Intelligent
------------------> Artifact
------------------> Trade goods and non-standard treasure
------------------> Alternate rewards (titles, etc)
------------------> Ray guns and flying cars

Treasure should be meaningful, not assumed, especially magic items. I am okay with pcs having a way to make a few items with meaningful effort- if you want to make a cloak of displacement, you need to go get the displacer beast's hide that you're going to use.

I am totally cool with non-standard, intelligent, cursed, alternative rewards; I am even okay with (limited) sci-fi elements (they are certainly in my campaign!).

Adventure with the party--> +trusted retainers
------------------> Followers, some day
------------------> A castle, some day
------------------> A domain, some day
------------------> Complications (ie a personal life)
------------------> Contacts (with rules for them)

I like all of these as add-ons; the base game should retain an elegant simplicity.

Minimal default setting --> Elaborated default
------------------>Homebrew
------------------> Published setting
------------------> Default cosmology -->Alt cosmology

Minimal default setting. ESPECIALLY if it's the goddamned Forgotten Realms. In fact, putting the FR into the 'core' books is one of the best ways to get me to not buy 5e (by whatever name).

The 3e MotP did a great job with the planes and cosmology, giving rich levels of detail while still showing alternatives to the "official" arrangement.

I'm totally okay with published setting info in its own books, but let's not take generic elements and put them in a "Monsters of Faerun" book or "DragonLance Monstrous Compendium". There is NO REASON I should have to buy a bunch of FR or DL monsters to get the generic stuff like perytons and death knights. NONE.

 

[TerraDave]

"Advancement via prestige classes"

See, I knew there was something I forgot!

And would it be like 3E (a new class) or 4E (a branching?).

Anyways, things that could be added to the list:

Prestige classes/paragon paths
multiclassing (and how!....)

Hp determination (roll, fixed, add Con (mod)...); though I am not sure this can be an option.